Izvestiya August 22, 2003 Article by Yevgeniy Primakov, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences and president of the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry: "A World Without Superpowers"
In the wake of the events of 11 September the conflict between two trends, two models of a world order became clearer than ever before. One is based on the joint perception of threats arising in the world, the joint countering of these threats, and joint efforts to stabilize the international situation with reliance being placed on the United Nations. The second is based on unilateral decisions and actions taken contrary not only to the UN Charter but also to the opinion of most states.
The experience of Iraq and Afghanistan shows that reliance on the United States' individual decisions has not led either to the stabilization of the situation in these countries or to the strengthening of the antiterrorist trend in world policy. The only apparent solution is for the Bush administration to abandon its unilateral approach and to get back on the track of joint actions. The first faint symptoms of this have already appeared. Thus, while the role of the occupying authorities created by the United States has been retained in Iraq, the "slipping" of the Iraqi problem into the UN fold has emerged. Unless this turns into an empty formality, the arguments in favor of the possibility of deciding the question of the future world order in the interests of all states will be reinforced.
The practice of unilaterally taken decisions and unilateral actions based on them runs counter to objective processes in the world economy and international relations. Such objective processes include above all globalization and the transnationalization of entrepreneurial activity, which are making the world more interrelated and interdependent. I would categorize the structural changes in international relations that have occurred since the end of the Cold War as incompatible with the practice of "unilateralism" in politics.
During the Cold War, while two systems existed there were also two superpowers -- the Soviet Union and the United States. Today there are no superpowers at all -- the Soviet Union has ceased to exist but the United States, although it possesses exceptional political influence and is the world's most powerful state militarily and economically, has also lost its status. The actual concept of a "superpower" was a category of the Cold War era, and was defined not only by quantitative but also by qualitative indicators. A superpower united a conglomerate of states around itself, ensuring their security in a fierce confrontation with an opposing bloc. It was the ensuring of other states' security that allowed a superpower to dominate in the making of decisions, which alliance allies were obliged to obey. The picture has now changed. The absence of global confrontation precludes the need, for example, for a "nuclear umbrella," which both the United States and the USSR "opened" over their allies and partners.
Another indication of the incompatibility of "unilateralism" with existing reality is the fact that after the end of the Cold War the world started to develop toward a multipolar structure. This conclusion can be illustrated with a whole series of examples. The EU is one of them. Who could have thought just 10 years ago that West Europe, when it was uniting for economic reasons, would strive for both political and military integration? But the EU is now turning into a "center of power" comparable in scope with the United States.
Who would dare to claim that China, which is flexing its economic muscles, will become part of the system of a unipolar world and will meekly trail behind events which are determined by one center? This also concerns Russia, India, and Japan. A multipolar system does not at all mean that "centers of power" are doomed to an endless struggle against each other. Conversely, a unipolar world does not guarantee the end of such a struggle, because the others cannot get away from the fact that one of the "centers of power" is dominant. Of course, the establishment of multipolarity is proceeding with difficulty and requires a long time, but it is the main vector of development. And it will not change just because some people are sure that the best model of the international order is when the United States is in charge of everybody. The claim that any US actions are good for mankind is extremely debatable.
_________________________________________________________________ Enter for your chance to IM with Bon Jovi, Seal, Bow Wow, or Mary J Blige using MSN Messenger http://entertainment.msn.com/imastar